Should we play UMass every year?

[CL82]

For those of us who have been around long enough to remember it, UMass was once our big rival, so it was satisfying thumping them. Given that SOS is going to matter for playoffs, should we be playing a team at the bottom of FBS football on an ongoing basis? If we give them a game close to home we'll be giving them a hand up in starting their program and while that's good for New England football in general, is it good for UConn? Of course, UMass's eventual emergence as a football team might well mark the death knell of BCU's efforts. It certainly gives Mass kids another option but that hurts us as well as BCU. What do you think?

 

[Brochacho]

Sure, but at this stage for their program we should get 2 homes for every away game until they are a capable program, if they ever reach that point.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Why would we not? As far as giving them a hand in building their program, I say that's complete nonsense. It's the same garbage that BCU fans throw out there to mask their fear of playing, and losing, to us. If it generates interest in college football up here, I'm all for it. It's exactly what BCU didn't have the foresight to see and is part of the reason they are where they are in terms of fan interest these days. It also doesn't hurt that they completely suck either......

 

[HuskyBlue08]

Yes, every year. Home and Home. Gillette is a closer drive for me and thousands of other people.

 

[UConnDan97]

It would serve multiple purposes:

1) It renews a historic rivalry that is arguably one of our top 3 biggest in our football program.
2) It will help to grow enthusiasm and interest in New England football.
3) It will help continue to marginalize a certain Catholic institution in Boston.
4) The road games will draw multiple thousands of UConn fans due to its proximity.
5) It will continue to cement the idea that we are the number 1 football team in New England.

I like the sound of all of that, really...

 

[junglehusky]

I voted no, but would be totally willing to revisit the question in a few years.

 

[gioff23]

YES! Although, I might call the new AD at BCU (once there) and say, hey, last chance, we're looking for a regional rival to set a 10 game home/home with - you interested? I'm fine w/home and home w/UMass - use the Foxboro game as a game to have your MASS targets visit

 

[Carl Spackler]

It will be a little while before UMass is ready to compete at a high level, faster than a lot of folks around here think, I'll tell you that.

The thing about building tradition around a football program is scheduling. THat's what was great about the Yale - UConn games in the past. THe UConn UMass games in the past. You knew every fall, no matter what was happening with the program, up or down, those games were on the schedule. I would be very happy to see UMass / UConn as a regular early season matchup. It sure as hell benefits us for the immediate, and it will be good for them too, and for football in the northeast in general.

Now - having said that? It would be nice to see, but I'd trade UMass in a second, for a MIchigan of the world, as our regular non-conference yearly on the schedule. Ideally we'd have both, a regular UMass, and a regular big 10 opponent.

It's always bothered me how Ferentz and UConn in the current era haven't connected out at Iowa. I wonder what the response would be out there, to scheduling a series with Iowa.

Manuel? Bueller?

 

[John]

I say yes - I was thinking last night that it'd be fun if this were every year or every other year. Sure beats some of the other Hofstra-type borefests that we've had. And hey, the UMass fans (and band) represented last night, which adds to the experience. BTW, how long is the drive from Amherst, about an hour? more?

 

[Carl Spackler]

THe only reasons that UConn, UMass, and BC aren't already scheduled for yearly matchups into the future, are three fold, politics, ESPN, and personal ego.

THankfully, a lot of that is set for big time change, and has already changed.

I still want Big 10 home and home regularly as the goal though.

UConn/UMass/BC scheduling regularly - is a no brainer - once you get past ESPN, politics, and personal ego.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

UConn is still a developing program. . . that's what we keep saying. So why give another competitor a seat at the table? Not until we have a stranglehold on the New England area. Remember Syracuse use to farm Connecticut and Mass and the rest of the area. UConn got itself up and running and well . . . that sure as heck changed for the Orange PDQ. Last night served it's purpose, show the once upon a time "big dog" of the Yankee Conference, how far in the rear view mirror the Huskies have left them and the vast diffence between a real D1 school and a transition 1AA program.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

THe only reasons that UConn, UMass, and BC aren't already scheduled for yearly matchups into the future, are three fold, politics, ESPN, and personal ego.

THankfully, a lot of that is set for big time change, and has already changed.

I still want Big 10 home and home regularly as the goal though.

UConn/UMass/BC scheduling regularly - is a no brainer - once you get past ESPN, politics, and personal ego.

Scheduling BCU? Sure. As soon as either they come back to the BE or UConn has an ACC invite. Otherwise, suffer in geographic isolation Eagles.

 

[mattp]

i think anyone that voted yes need to seriously consider how many OOC opportunities we'll have every year. if we schedule 2 OOC BCS home and home type games every year and a 1AA we only have one more game left and i don't want it to be UMass every year. i like playing them. i think it makes sense geographically and rivalry-wise but we don't have enough holes in our schedule to play them every year. every 2 or 3 years is more feasible IMO and i would like them all to be home games.

if we play them every year we'll need to either ditch our 1AA (i wouldn't be at all opposed to this but i don't think it'll happen) or lose a BCS game to add another MAC team

as an aside, how long will UMass be using Gillette? it was my understanding they'll only be using if for 2-3 years so the point that Gillette is closer to the Rent is kind of moot in terms of playing at UMass

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

i think anyone that voted yes need to seriously consider how many OOC opportunities we'll have every year. if we schedule 2 OOC BCS home and home type games every year and a 1AA we only have one more game left and i don't want it to be UMass every year. i like playing them. i think it makes sense geographically and rivalry-wise but we don't have enough holes in our schedule to play them every year. every 2 or 3 years is more feasible IMO and i would like them all to be home games.

if we play them every year we'll need to either ditch our 1AA (i wouldn't be at all opposed to this but i don't think it'll happen) or lose a BCS game to add another MAC team

as an aside, how long will UMass be using Gillette? it was my understanding they'll only be using if for 2-3 years so the point that Gillette is closer to the Rent is kind of moot in terms of playing at UMass

That's a fair point, but I think there's room for UMass. With Aresco going on record last night saying the league is looking to add a 14th member, we're going to be playing 8 or 9 conference games every year. That leaves 3 or 4 openings. I'm not sure we're going to schedule any more FCS schools going forward (at least I hope not). At least 1 of those OOC games is going to be a MAC team. Why not let it be UMass?

 

[Dann]

2-1 with umass. sign a 10 yearish deal. @rent @razor @rent
2-2 with army. sign a 8 year deal. @rent @nyc @army @rent

these 2 schools are close. playing army can be instead of a fcs game and umass should be our only mac team on the schedule in the future. no more buffalo or others. one day when we expand, there 2 relationships will be important. easy season games vs bad programs who mean nothing to this area wont sell out 50k. these 2 programs can help us do that. umass every year will get a bigger fan base traveling to the rent. army can be something special. give them a bigger allotment when we expand and let them bring 5k students and put them in the upper deck or something. its not a long bus ride for them and it makes sense to have this type of relationship.

 

[UConnDan97]

That's a fair point, but I think there's room for UMass. With Aresco going on record last night saying the league is looking to add a 14th member, we're going to be playing 8 or 9 conference games every year. That leaves 3 or 4 openings. I'm not sure we're going to schedule any more FCS schools going forward (at least I hope not). At least 1 of those OOC games is going to be a MAC team. Why not let it be UMass?

They should continue the "U Game" before they ever consider scheduling Buffalo again. Nothing against Buffalo, but at least this game means a little something to both fan bases...

 

[UCFBfan]

I was wondering what the UMass fan turnout was like? If they traveled well to the game I don't see why we wouldn't schedule them every season. I'm tired of the FCS games and with the new playoff system I wouldn't be shocked to see teams not scheduling them anymore. I can't see how it would help SOS if that becomes a part of the criteria.

As for the people who worry that UMass will infringe on our recruiting because they just might beat us, I don't buy it. I think if anything, our beat downs of them will help us even more with recruiting because we'll continue to be seen as the bigger, better program. Playing in the NBE or whatever conference we go to will always be more attractive to recruits than playing in the MAC at UMass. I think anything that builds interest in the Northeast in CFB is a good thing. Right now there are no rivalries that people care about (Sorry but Harvard-Yale is weak). If BC is gonna remain stupid then let's get UMass on the schedule and build something together.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

For those of us who have been around long enough to remember it, UMass was once our big rival, so it was satisfying thumping them. Given that SOS is going to matter for playoffs, should we be playing a team at the bottom of FBS football on an ongoing basis? If we give them a game close to home we'll be giving them a hand up in starting their program and while that's good for New England football in general, is it good for UConn? Of course, UMass's eventual emergence as a football team might well mark the death knell of BCU's efforts. It certainly gives Mass kids another option but that hurts us as well as BCU. What do you think?

I go back as far as you do and I will admit that there is a different hatred for that dump to the north than for most other schools. That said, I would not mind something like a 3-2 (Rent for three, Foxboro for two) arrangement spread over and eight year period. There is no need to play them more often than that and there really is not reason to allow this to be viewed much differently than one would view for example Auburn vs Tulane. Yes, they are geographically compatible and yes, in the past they did compete in the same conference but there are very few true similarities. I can honestly see them having a small amount of (MAC) success and there fan base immediately behaving as they did when they finally had a basketball team capable of making the postseason in the early 1990's. We have bigger fish to fry (so to speak) at the moment.

On a lighter note, before the game on the way into the stadium we walked past a female clad in maroon who to be blunt was quite beastly (a good 70 lbs overweight and likely would not be attractive if she lost those 70 lbs). I mentioned to a friend (who had no idea of the late 1970's early 1980's mood between the two schools) that she was Umass' homecoming queen. After he chuckled I added that she also is the toughest member of their football team. He made a comment about (certain lady parts that would get filtered here) to which I replied "very few of the women at UMass have those. Most of the men there do however!".

 

[CL82]

They should continue the "U Game" before they ever consider scheduling Buffalo again. Nothing against Buffalo, but at least this game means a little something to both fan bases...

Geesh Dan, please call it anything but that. Worst marketing in the history of sports.

Matt, I think replacing a 1AA opponent is the right compromise at least in the near term. Although the game may lose it's appeal if it continues to be this one sided.

 

[UConnDan97]

Geesh Dan, please call it anything but that. Worst marketing in the history of sports.

Matt, I think replacing a 1AA opponent is the right compromise at least in the near term. Although the game may lose it's appeal if it continues to be this one sided.

The problem is that it has made it to Wikipedia. And as we all know; if it's on Wikipedia, it's true!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UConn–UMass_football_rivalry

 

[huskypantz]

I think they can fit perfectly into our schedule. We have 4 OOC games per year. Once BCS home game, one BCS road game, one FCS home game and one more opponent. We don't generate enough income to buy a MAC home game annually. We will almost always need a game against a non-BCS, non-FCS opponent. That opponent should be local - so UMass, Army or Buffalo. One game at the Rent and the return at Gillette. UMass brought a solid 2-3k fans with them, no other FBS non-BCS opponent will do that. We should get financial incentives to play at Gillette. Maybe the school negotiates to get a portion of the ticket proceeds for UConn sales. We know that will be the cheapest road trip the football team can possibly take. I bet we could get 3k students up to Gillette, and definitely more than 10k total annually. Offer a slightly discounted ticket if you buy with your season ticket package. I'm all for it. Full disclosure, I live 10 miles from Gillette.

 

[weyuo]

I think we'll see in the fairly near future a schedule that has UMass on it one year, BC the following. Defillipo is gone and I'll bet BC doesn't want to play third fiddle in New England football. The only way to avoid that is become a top 10 team(unlikely) or play us & UMass. It would be nice if it was the opener each year. That could build some tradition and anything promoting D-1 football in New England is a good thing so lets plant that seed. It still gives us three more non conference games a year so we can still play a Big 10 school, an ACC school and a combination of SEC or Big 12 school. Also keep in mind that the Big East of the future is going to be a grind. SMU will eventually return to a very good program. The Florida schools will improve. So will Houston. I can see BYU in the picture along with Air Force. After the 2013 season we won't have anything to worry about as far a strength of schedule. The Huskies need to run the table so they at least get a look at that national championship playoff.

Besides, UMass won't always be some middle of the pack MAC team. They'll grow just like we have grown. They'll start recruiting out of region just like we are doing more and more. The only thing different about the Big 10 and UConn is they've had a 100 year head start on filling their schedule with big boy programs and attracting prime recruits because of it but we'll catch up. We only have a decade jump on UMass so they'll catch up to us even quicker. And that can only be a good thing.

Example of a typical UConn schedule in the future:

labor day weekend: vs/@ UMass or BC
Week 2: @/vs WVU or Pitt or another of the old Big East teams to rekindle old rivalry games
Week 3: vs/@ Penn St (definitely see coach P getting them on schedule)more than other Big 10 teams but one of the B1G
Week 4: vs/@ Temple
Week 5: @/vs T. A&M or Mizzou or another middle of the pack SEC team
Week 6: vs/@ SMU or another of the west div of Big East teams
Week 7: bye
Week 8: @/vs Louisville
Week 9: @/vs Boise St or another of the west div of Big East teams
Week 10: vs/@ SFU
Week 11: @/vs Cincy
Week 12: bye
Week 13: @/vs Navy
Week 14: vs/@ Rutgers (can be switched with Temple depending on which team we build a bitter rivalry with
as a season ending holiday/homecoming event)


A typical schedule like that would give you a game vs 4 or more ranked teams.

 

[BigEastCT]

I would like to play umass every year as long as this is followed:

1) we no longer schedule a 1AA team: we need to improve our strength of schedule. I also hope the new commissioner does not permit BE members to play 1AA teams.... there are plenty of conference usa teams to beat up on and we need to change our image and this could be a start.

2) we no longer schedule any more MAC teams. (I never want to see buffalo on the schedule anymore) and since UMASS is in the MAC it will fill the gap.

On a side note I have mentioned in the past I would like to open the season against Army every year in lieu of a 1AA teams. I no longer want to play western michigan, ohio, akron,..etc...

 

[BigEastCT]

I would like to play umass every year as long as this is followed:

1) we no longer schedule a 1AA team: we need to improve our strength of schedule. I also hope the new commissioner does not permit BE members to play 1AA teams.... there are plenty of conference usa teams to beat up on and we need to change our image and this could be a start.

2) we no longer schedule any more MAC teams. (I never want to see buffalo on the schedule anymore) and since UMASS is in the MAC it will fill the gap.

On a side note I have mentioned in the past I would like to open the season against Army every year in lieu of a 1AA teams. I no longer want to play western michigan, ohio, akron,..etc...

In summary

1)Army
2)Umass
3)Temple
4)Pennst
5)Rutgers
6)Cincinnati
7)Louisville
8)Boise St, Houston, SMU, SDU
9) South Florida
10) Boston College- Thanksgving weekend
11) Navy
12) Boise St, Houston, SMU, SDU

 

[BugsyCT]

I say yes. Beats playing Buffalo every year. And if it helps promote CFB in New England, redevelops a local rivalry (and sticks it to BC in the process), I'm for it.